4.6 Article

Critical role for Env as well as Gag-Pol in control of a simian-human immunodeficiency virus 89.6P challenge by a DNA prime/recombinant modified vaccinia virus Ankara vaccine

期刊

JOURNAL OF VIROLOGY
卷 76, 期 12, 页码 6138-6146

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/JVI.76.12.6138-6146.2002

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. NCRR NIH HHS [P51 RR000165, P51 RR00165] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIAID NIH HHS [AI 85343, P01 AI043045, P01 AI 43045] Funding Source: Medline
  3. NIDA NIH HHS [P30 DA 12121] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cellular immune responses against epitopes in conserved Gag and Pol sequences of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 have become popular targets for candidate AIDS vaccines. Recently, we used a simian-human immunodeficiency virus model (SHIV 89.6P) with macaques to demonstrate the control of a pathogenic mucosal challenge by priming with Gag-Pol-Env-expressing DNA and boosting with Gag-Pol-Env-expressing recombinant modified vaccinia virus Ankara (rMVA). Here we tested Gag-Pol DNA priming and Gag-Pol rMVA boosting to evaluate the contribution of anti-Env immune responses to viral control. The Gag-Pol vaccine raised frequencies of Gag-specific T cells similar to those raised by the Gag-Pol-Env vaccine. Following challenge, these rapidly expanded to counter the challenge infection. Despite this, the control of the SHIV 89.6P challenge was delayed and inconsistent in the Gag-Pol-vaccinated group and all of the animals underwent severe and, in most cases, sustained loss of CD4(+) cells. Interestingly, most of the CD4(+) cells that were lost in the Gag-Pol-vaccinated group were uninfected cells. We suggest that the rapid appearance of binding antibody for Env in Gag-Pol-Env-vaccinated animals helped protect uninfected CD4(+) cells from Env-induced apoptosis. Our results highlight the importance of immune responses to Env, as well as to Gag-Pol, in the control of immunodeficiency virus challenges and the protection of CD4(+) cells.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据